Can someone explain the difference between the latest book, the latest movie and the latest music CD as it pertains to property?
Simple - there's no DRM in a book. (Well, except for eBooks). They don't mind (publishers) if you LEND books to people. And the fights about copying were all fought and settled fifteen years ago, when the Xerox became ubiquitous.
1. 320 x 480 millions of colors bright lcd screen, as big as the form factor will allow. 2. A little thinner & a millimeter or two wider than the Handspring Visor Deluxe 3. Multiple handwriting-recognition methods (graffitti, etc.) and good voice recognition, including voice file management and speech recognition indexing 4. Unix-based operating system (Linux, BSD, OS X) with command line utility 5. 802.11b and cellular wireless connectivity (in the same form factor) 6. 64 MB working memory, 1 GB storage memory (in the same form factor) 7. Email, calendar, web, ebook, clock, calculator, memo, expenses/money management, games, text editor, word processor, spreadsheet, various command line utilities, including grep, perl, ftp, ssh, etc. all above and beyond the memory listed above. 8. full unicode support 9. encrypted memory & strong security (both physical and electronic)
Asside from that, how can you account for the losses in translations?
Usually they do so by claiming that particular translations were more or less inspired (look up "divinely inspired King James Bible literal" on Google some time; note that these folks usually don't know a damned thing about the translation process, don't know e.g. that the KJV used big chunks of other translations as cribs, and certainly don't know anything about the textual criticism of the originals - that the various early texts of the Bible - not the translations, but the Greek, Aramaic, and Hebrew texts - are not consistent with one another!).
That said, it really is better not to argue with folks about their religious beliefs. It is in the nature of religious belief to override all other experience in one's judgment.
But what this has to do with this interview, I don't really see; and I'm not sure what the questioner's point is in the interview, either. Unlike Christianity, which has a long history of conflict with modern science, Judaism has tended to be more flexible in accommodating theology to science. It would never have occurred to me to ask how a Jewish scientist was able to make that accommodation, though it would occur to me to ask a Christian or Muslim scientist (depending upon which strains of Christianity and Islam they represented).
And it should be noted that the Darwin IA32 port has pretty strict hardware limitations. How many of these "when is OS X gonna be available for my cheap Intel box" folks have actually managed to get Darwin running on their Intel box?
Re:If Amazon is so ephemeral . . .
on
Amazon.Heartbreak
·
· Score: 1
Thanks for responding, Mike. The problem is that ephemeral doesn't mean "changing its definition constantly," it means "lasting only a day;" the typical example is the morning glory flower (and one can see how the morning glory would be a good metaphor for e.g. iCast or pets.com). However weird life at Amazon might be, and however stupid some of us think the Sears-of-the-World-Wide-Web approach is in the long term, Amazon has survived the biggest of the dot-com shakeouts so far.
The best term for what you're talking about might be "inconstant," as in "oh, not th' inconstant moon" (from Romeo & Juliet).
The thing is, JK's entire piece is suggestive of an Amazon that HADN'T survived. But it has, however much those who used to be fans of the quirky-bookstore Amazon wish perhaps it hadn't.
Good luck, anyway. I think you'll find providing an Amazon (and Barnes and Noble, and Borders, and Wordsworth) product a lot more satisfying than providing Amazon service.
Isn't the idea behind sourceforge to host smaller projects that don't have the resources to host their own site? And so wouldn't that, naturally, skew your results?
The real question is this: how many people's work does the average OSS user use in a day?
Speaking as a person who used to use gopher quite a bit - how many gopher links are left on the WWW? Three?
I use the gopher protocol all the time - to read mailing list archives. For that purpose, it can't be beat. Of course, I usually use Lynx to do so, but every once in a while I actually use a browser (I even used IE6 on one today).
It doesn't matter why or for what reasons the treaty was accepted by AMERICANS. What matters is what it does. The outer space treaty is basis for the outer space policy of the United Nations, and therefore of the 189 member states of the United Nations. But obviosly we know better than all of them.
Yeah, actually we do. Or at least most of them. That's like saying that Iraq and North Korea outweigh the US because they are two nations and we are one. Neither are democracies, their total voting populations (let's see, the two nations put together have, TWO voters, while we have 300 million) are a fraction of ours.
Remember that the real power in the UN is controlled by the five permanent members, three of which are long-standing democracies (excluding that little Vichy thing in the 40s), and one of which is a developing democracy (the Russian Federation). Also remember that there are countries like India (a democracy with four times the voting population of the US), Germany, Australia, and Canada in the UN.
This thread is right. I, unfortunately, am an American, and the last thing I want to see (knowing the sadism and evil of most Americans) is what the article's author suggests: spatial areas or other planetary bodies being ruled by America. It won't benefit ordinary Americans, whether good or bad; it will benefit corporate CEOs, period.
I, fortunately, am an American, and I still think that the National Review article was off-base, and that the current treaty serves a vital purpose. Just because one yahoo at the National Review sounds like an ultranationalist, don't paint us all with that brush.
Here is the real point of the article. The author is yet another anti-UN zealot, and his entire attack on the treaty mentioned is a thinly veiled attack on that body. Personally, I think an UN-headed colony on Mars or the Moon would be a great way to go.
Not so veiled, at all. It is the National Review, which is, after all, a right wing political journal. And one would expect a left wing political journal like the Nation to support the treaty as a gesture toward internationalism. In either case, the ideology would come first, and the analysis spun to preserve the phenomena.
Daisey's hilarious, heartbreaking and surprisingly powerful recounting of life inside what may be the world's strangest, most ephemeral company
Ok, if Amazon is so ephemeral, how come it's still in business? Reading the review, one would think Amazon was broke, out of business, and gone to the great DNS in the sky. It's still around. Maybe they're not doing everything right, but they're doing something.
Just Symantec trying to boost sales of their Macintosh product. I use a Mac without MSOffice, and I almost never use IE (I use OmniWeb, Chimera, or full Mozilla instead), and only use OS X (don't use Virtual PC). None of the viruses they're talking about (except maybe Sub7, though all but one of the SubSeven viruses listed in Symantec's only encyclopedia are said to affect.exe files - not a Mac problem). Sure, there are probably a few Unix vulnerability that could hurt me, but compared to the 1 copy I get of Klez.H per day, I feel much safer on my Mac.
For Mac see Fizilla: or, for the boring, "Mozilla for MacOS X"
http://www.mozilla.org/ports/fizzilla/
Actually, the two Fizillas are simply carbon Mozillas. For a Gecko-based browser with OS X's look and feel, you should download Chimera, a Cocoaized Mozilla-based browser. Chimera I think is a browser-only version, as is mozilla/browser (for Windows; don't have a URI).
First Microsoft is right for once, and now the RIAA is right for once. Better step up the fur coat exports to Gehenna, 'cause it's getting COLD down there.
Use a Mac you can type any characters yoiu want even with an US keyboard
Yes, you can use the Unicode Hex Input Keyboard on Mac (at least, on OS X) to enter any supported Unicode character, but there are characters which cannot be entered on a Mac using the other keyboards (for instance, some ancient Greek characters, used in e.g. Homer and the Bible, cannot be typed on a Mac without the Unicode Hex Editor).
The fundamental problem, though, is with the ancestor posting that said (to paraphrase) that they should use our writing system because it's the least common denominator. I've got news for you: not everyone in the world knows the Latin alphabet. If a Chinese site wants western users to access their pages, they'll have an ASCII domain as well as a Hanzu domain. Pages in English will have ASCII domains. Otherwise, since you'll need to know Chinese to read the site anyway, sites entirely in Chinese will have Domain Names in Chinese, and it won't be a problem for anyone who can actually read the sites.
Actually, no, that is not what the judge found. They defendant may well be guilty of intellectual plagiarism, in the sense of "copying someone else's ideas and information without proper credit." However, plagiarism in that sense is not illegal; it is merely an ethical violation (which is why, e.g., Doris Kearns Goodwin isn't being sued by the writers she forgot to cite in one of her books). Plagiarism can even be the result of a mistake (see DKG again; it's clear that her plagiarism wasn't intentional). The copyright law only applies to the form of the expression, and on this count the judge found the plaintiff's claims wanting.
Saw it last night in a Loews, in analog. Terribly, terribly blurry. Maybe it was the projectionist, but the odd thing is, noone else seemed to complain.
The theater was also only half full. Now, this was at 6:45 pm on a Sunday at a very large, new, not very popular theater, but that was still a surprise.
There are proven server OS's for x86, i.e. Linux, FreeBSD, WindowsAS, BSDI
There are a lot of folks who don't want to spend the $$ on a WindowsAS license; the OS X license is unlimited users; and of course FreeBSD doesn't to my knowledge have a support staff (I could be wrong, here). For Linux, you've got RedHat among other choices, many of which have good support staff; but OS X has the advantage of being designed for the hardware in question.
Finally, as someone else pointed out above, G4s run cheaper (both in W and in heat) than PIII/P4s.
Looks like a good competitor for me. Sure, not for everyone (some places will stick with Windows, some hopefully will go to RedHat or another Linux distribution, and some will go to Sun, etc.), but it definitely has a market.
Slashdot Mirror
Can someone explain the difference between the latest book, the latest movie and the latest music CD as it pertains to property?
Simple - there's no DRM in a book. (Well, except for eBooks). They don't mind (publishers) if you LEND books to people. And the fights about copying were all fought and settled fifteen years ago, when the Xerox became ubiquitous.
1. 320 x 480 millions of colors bright lcd screen, as big as the form factor will allow.
2. A little thinner & a millimeter or two wider than the Handspring Visor Deluxe
3. Multiple handwriting-recognition methods (graffitti, etc.) and good voice recognition, including voice file management and speech recognition indexing
4. Unix-based operating system (Linux, BSD, OS X) with command line utility
5. 802.11b and cellular wireless connectivity (in the same form factor)
6. 64 MB working memory, 1 GB storage memory (in the same form factor)
7. Email, calendar, web, ebook, clock, calculator, memo, expenses/money management, games, text editor, word processor, spreadsheet, various command line utilities, including grep, perl, ftp, ssh, etc. all above and beyond the memory listed above.
8. full unicode support
9. encrypted memory & strong security (both physical and electronic)
You said wishlist, right?
"Computer discipline is like a box of chocolates," he says wryly. "You never know what you're going to get."
'Nuff said
Asside from that, how can you account for the losses in translations?
Usually they do so by claiming that particular translations were more or less inspired (look up "divinely inspired King James Bible literal" on Google some time; note that these folks usually don't know a damned thing about the translation process, don't know e.g. that the KJV used big chunks of other translations as cribs, and certainly don't know anything about the textual criticism of the originals - that the various early texts of the Bible - not the translations, but the Greek, Aramaic, and Hebrew texts - are not consistent with one another!). That said, it really is better not to argue with folks about their religious beliefs. It is in the nature of religious belief to override all other experience in one's judgment. But what this has to do with this interview, I don't really see; and I'm not sure what the questioner's point is in the interview, either. Unlike Christianity, which has a long history of conflict with modern science, Judaism has tended to be more flexible in accommodating theology to science. It would never have occurred to me to ask how a Jewish scientist was able to make that accommodation, though it would occur to me to ask a Christian or Muslim scientist (depending upon which strains of Christianity and Islam they represented).
The window frame and outside controls are all native widgets.
And some of the interior XUL controls are themed by XP, though they are not strictly native widgets.
I'd be shocked if they gave it anything higher. It's not a Microsoft product, ipso facto it can't be any good, in C|Net's eyes.
And it should be noted that the Darwin IA32 port has pretty strict hardware limitations. How many of these "when is OS X gonna be available for my cheap Intel box" folks have actually managed to get Darwin running on their Intel box?
Can't get there from here. That's impressive.
Thanks for responding, Mike. The problem is that ephemeral doesn't mean "changing its definition constantly," it means "lasting only a day;" the typical example is the morning glory flower (and one can see how the morning glory would be a good metaphor for e.g. iCast or pets.com). However weird life at Amazon might be, and however stupid some of us think the Sears-of-the-World-Wide-Web approach is in the long term, Amazon has survived the biggest of the dot-com shakeouts so far.
The best term for what you're talking about might be "inconstant," as in "oh, not th' inconstant moon" (from Romeo & Juliet).
The thing is, JK's entire piece is suggestive of an Amazon that HADN'T survived. But it has, however much those who used to be fans of the quirky-bookstore Amazon wish perhaps it hadn't.
Good luck, anyway. I think you'll find providing an Amazon (and Barnes and Noble, and Borders, and Wordsworth) product a lot more satisfying than providing Amazon service.
Apache is not on sourceforge, is it?
Mozilla is not on sourceforge, is it?
Linux kernel is not on sourceforge, is it?
Isn't the idea behind sourceforge to host smaller projects that don't have the resources to host their own site? And so wouldn't that, naturally, skew your results?
The real question is this: how many people's work does the average OSS user use in a day?
Speaking as a person who used to use gopher quite a bit - how many gopher links are left on the WWW? Three?
I use the gopher protocol all the time - to read mailing list archives. For that purpose, it can't be beat. Of course, I usually use Lynx to do so, but every once in a while I actually use a browser (I even used IE6 on one today).
It doesn't matter why or for what reasons the treaty was accepted by AMERICANS. What matters is what it does. The outer space treaty is basis for the outer space policy of the United Nations, and therefore of the 189 member states of the United Nations. But obviosly we know better than all of them.
Yeah, actually we do. Or at least most of them. That's like saying that Iraq and North Korea outweigh the US because they are two nations and we are one. Neither are democracies, their total voting populations (let's see, the two nations put together have, TWO voters, while we have 300 million) are a fraction of ours.
Remember that the real power in the UN is controlled by the five permanent members, three of which are long-standing democracies (excluding that little Vichy thing in the 40s), and one of which is a developing democracy (the Russian Federation). Also remember that there are countries like India (a democracy with four times the voting population of the US), Germany, Australia, and Canada in the UN.
This thread is right. I, unfortunately, am an American, and the last thing I want to see (knowing the sadism and evil of most Americans) is what the article's author suggests: spatial areas or other planetary bodies being ruled by America. It won't benefit ordinary Americans, whether good or bad; it will benefit corporate CEOs, period.
I, fortunately, am an American, and I still think that the National Review article was off-base, and that the current treaty serves a vital purpose. Just because one yahoo at the National Review sounds like an ultranationalist, don't paint us all with that brush.
Here is the real point of the article. The author is yet another anti-UN zealot, and his entire attack on the treaty mentioned is a thinly veiled attack on that body. Personally, I think an UN-headed colony on Mars or the Moon would be a great way to go.
Not so veiled, at all. It is the National Review, which is, after all, a right wing political journal. And one would expect a left wing political journal like the Nation to support the treaty as a gesture toward internationalism. In either case, the ideology would come first, and the analysis spun to preserve the phenomena.
Daisey's hilarious, heartbreaking and surprisingly powerful recounting of life inside what may be the world's strangest, most ephemeral company
Ok, if Amazon is so ephemeral, how come it's still in business? Reading the review, one would think Amazon was broke, out of business, and gone to the great DNS in the sky. It's still around. Maybe they're not doing everything right, but they're doing something.
Just Symantec trying to boost sales of their Macintosh product. I use a Mac without MSOffice, and I almost never use IE (I use OmniWeb, Chimera, or full Mozilla instead), and only use OS X (don't use Virtual PC). None of the viruses they're talking about (except maybe Sub7, though all but one of the SubSeven viruses listed in Symantec's only encyclopedia are said to affect .exe files - not a Mac problem). Sure, there are probably a few Unix vulnerability that could hurt me, but compared to the 1 copy I get of Klez.H per day, I feel much safer on my Mac.
Chimera is made from Mozilla code, with a Cocoa front end. That is what makes it a chimera.
Doesn't anyone think it interesting that in its second week, Star Wars beat Spider Man in its fourth week?
For Mac see Fizilla: or, for the boring, "Mozilla for MacOS X" http://www.mozilla.org/ports/fizzilla/
Actually, the two Fizillas are simply carbon Mozillas. For a Gecko-based browser with OS X's look and feel, you should download Chimera, a Cocoaized Mozilla-based browser. Chimera I think is a browser-only version, as is mozilla/browser (for Windows; don't have a URI).
First Microsoft is right for once, and now the RIAA is right for once. Better step up the fur coat exports to Gehenna, 'cause it's getting COLD down there.
Two comments about grammar, two different misspellings? Is that a record or something?
Use a Mac you can type any characters yoiu want even with an US keyboard
Yes, you can use the Unicode Hex Input Keyboard on Mac (at least, on OS X) to enter any supported Unicode character, but there are characters which cannot be entered on a Mac using the other keyboards (for instance, some ancient Greek characters, used in e.g. Homer and the Bible, cannot be typed on a Mac without the Unicode Hex Editor).
The fundamental problem, though, is with the ancestor posting that said (to paraphrase) that they should use our writing system because it's the least common denominator. I've got news for you: not everyone in the world knows the Latin alphabet. If a Chinese site wants western users to access their pages, they'll have an ASCII domain as well as a Hanzu domain. Pages in English will have ASCII domains. Otherwise, since you'll need to know Chinese to read the site anyway, sites entirely in Chinese will have Domain Names in Chinese, and it won't be a problem for anyone who can actually read the sites.
Actually, no, that is not what the judge found. They defendant may well be guilty of intellectual plagiarism, in the sense of "copying someone else's ideas and information without proper credit." However, plagiarism in that sense is not illegal; it is merely an ethical violation (which is why, e.g., Doris Kearns Goodwin isn't being sued by the writers she forgot to cite in one of her books). Plagiarism can even be the result of a mistake (see DKG again; it's clear that her plagiarism wasn't intentional). The copyright law only applies to the form of the expression, and on this count the judge found the plaintiff's claims wanting.
Saw it last night in a Loews, in analog. Terribly, terribly blurry. Maybe it was the projectionist, but the odd thing is, noone else seemed to complain. The theater was also only half full. Now, this was at 6:45 pm on a Sunday at a very large, new, not very popular theater, but that was still a surprise.
There are proven server OS's for x86, i.e. Linux, FreeBSD, WindowsAS, BSDI
There are a lot of folks who don't want to spend the $$ on a WindowsAS license; the OS X license is unlimited users; and of course FreeBSD doesn't to my knowledge have a support staff (I could be wrong, here). For Linux, you've got RedHat among other choices, many of which have good support staff; but OS X has the advantage of being designed for the hardware in question.
Finally, as someone else pointed out above, G4s run cheaper (both in W and in heat) than PIII/P4s.
Looks like a good competitor for me. Sure, not for everyone (some places will stick with Windows, some hopefully will go to RedHat or another Linux distribution, and some will go to Sun, etc.), but it definitely has a market.